IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs Microsoft System Center comparison

IBM and Microsoft are both solutions in the Application Infrastructure category. IBM is ranked #16 with an average rating of 8.0, while Microsoft is ranked #13 with an average rating of 8.4. IBM holds a 1.9% mindshare in AIS, compared to Microsoft’s 1.0% mindshare. Additionally, 84% of IBM users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 85% of Microsoft users who would recommend it.

IBM WebSphere Message Broker

Read 13 IBM WebSphere Message Broker reviews

980 Views
284 Comparison Views

84% willing to recommend

Microsoft System Center

Read 19 Microsoft System Center reviews

469 Views
188 Comparison Views

85% willing to recommend

IBM WebSphere Message Broker

Microsoft System Center

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 5, 2025

IBM WebSphere Message Broker and Microsoft System Center both compete in the enterprise system integration space. IBM WebSphere gains an edge with its advanced features, while Microsoft System Center attracts with its cost efficiency and broad capabilities.

Features: IBM WebSphere Message Broker offers powerful message routing and transformation capabilities, facilitating protocol conversion support, making it ideal for complex enterprise integration tasks. In contrast, Microsoft System Center provides a comprehensive suite of tools for data center and cloud management, excelling in system monitoring, deployment automation, and configuration management.

Room for Improvement: IBM WebSphere could benefit from a simplified user interface, enhanced cloud compatibility, and more streamlined update processes. Microsoft System Center can improve in interoperability with non-Microsoft environments, enhance its mobile device management, and provide deeper analytics insights without third-party tools.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: IBM WebSphere's deployment is complex but supported by robust technical assistance. Microsoft System Center features a more straightforward deployment process, bolstered by extensive community resources, enhancing its attractiveness.

Pricing and ROI: IBM WebSphere presents higher setup costs, justified by its advanced integration features, offering solid ROI for complex environments. Microsoft System Center is more budget-friendly with a faster ROI, particularly appealing to budget-sensitive enterprises.

To learn more, read our detailed IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. Microsoft System Center Report (Updated: July 2025).

Buyer's Guide

IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. Microsoft System Center

July 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 865,384 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Categories and Ranking

IBM WebSphere Message Broker

Ranking in Application Infrastructure

16th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) (8th)

Microsoft System Center

Ranking in Application Infrastructure

13th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Cloud Monitoring Software (19th)

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Application Infrastructure category, the mindshare of IBM WebSphere Message Broker is 1.9%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft System Center is 1.0%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Infrastructure

Featured Reviews

BrajendraKumar

Technical Architect at HCL Technologies

Offers large-sized business information processing with a time-saving setup and impressive stability

I primarily use two previews of the product for Dev and two for QA as part of the production process. Whatever tools our company is using, the cost of a license in IBM WebSphere Message Broker is about 80% of all these software or tools. The message routing capabilities satisfy workflow efficiency. The product supports message formats of XML, JSON, and SSID, which are around 24 KB to 50 KB in size. The solution supports communication protocols like STTP and TCP. Features like DataGraph need to be introduced in IBM WebSphere Message Broker. Some of the clients of our organization are using an outdated version of IBM WebSphere Message Broker for which the vendor doesn't provide direct support anymore. For the aforementioned version, our company professionals can solve the queries on their own without seeking support from IBM. During the installation of a prior version of IBM WebSphere Message Broker, sometimes I have to configure the failovers through the cluster, where issues arise, and I often seek help from the support team. The solution is being used by some medicine companies in our organization that receive sales orders from the EDR or JDE. I would not recommend the product to others as its becoming obsolete and they can rather choose a middleware solution from Amazon or Azure. But I would overall rate the product a nine out of ten.

Read full review

Ajinkya Mohod

System Security Engineer at Punch Powertrain nv

Makes user management and application management easy for users

Speaking about the impact of the automation feature that impacted our company's operational efficiency, I can say that the complete tool works on automation. You just have to configure it, and it works, especially in areas like auto-patching updates. I suggest that others can definitely go ahead with Microsoft System Center, especially beginners who choose it, can get hands-on experience with it, and acquire a good understanding of how things work. In terms of the value and benefits derived from the use of the solution, I can say that my company's operations have been made simpler because of the product, especially in areas like user management and application management where we have been benefited a lot. I rate the tool a nine out of ten.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"IBM WebSphere Message Broker is one of the best middleware solutions"

"Performance-wise, this solution is really good."

"It is a scalable solution...The setup is easy."

"It's reliable for our day-to-day operations, ensuring fast and secure data integration across different systems."

"The most valuable feature of IBM WebSphere Message Broker is the ability to facilitate communication with legacy systems, offering a multitude of great capabilities. For example, if there is a mainframe system in place with a web service serving as the front end. In that case, the solution enables efficient protocol transformations to convert all request payloads into a format that the legacy systems can accept, rendering the integration and transformation processes seamless and highly effective."

"Message Broker is valuable because most of the applications are using MQ. Even in my current engagement, the few applications which I audit to onboard the bank are using MQ."

"We only use the basic features, but the most valuable one for us is the Publish-subscribe pattern."

"Integration and mapping are easy, which is a major advantage."

More IBM WebSphere Message Broker pros

"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it helps us manage our company's application pool, license pool, application update pool, and OS updates."

"The deployment and asset management features are the most valuable. These are the product's main features."

"We like Microsoft System Center's Operations Manager. That is primarily why we use it."

"Good for managing and administering the infrastructure."

"The solution is easily available. That's its most valuable aspect."

"The most valuable feature of Microsoft System Center is its GUI (graphical user interface)."

"The product's initial setup phase was easy."

"The detail in the alarms is great."

More Microsoft System Center pros

Cons

"Technical support is very slow and needs to be improved."

"There is some lag in the GUI. There have been some performance issues and maybe it's because of the application data."

"The installation configuration is quite difficult."

"I know that Message Broker was a very tightly copied product with another IBM product, that is, IBM MQ. I would like to have a little bit more decoupling from the IBM MQ because it should not be a prerequisite for IBM WebSphere Message Broker usage."

"The solution can add container engines such as docker."

"Stability and pricing are areas with shortcomings that need improvement."

"Today I probably wouldn't go for Message Broker because of the cost structure, support, and the whole ecosystem around IBM."

"As our business requirements evolve, we require more dynamic capabilities to adapt and scale our services accordingly."

More IBM WebSphere Message Broker cons

"Something super important that we need is this integration via Intune Configuration Manager."

"Most of the documentation is online, however, there are some gaps there. The product documentation still refers back to the 2012 Server. We're pretty much in 2022. There's a ten-year gap there."

"The multi-tenancy support needs to be improved. We need to have the ability to manage several different environments from one central point of administration."

"The solution's dashboard needs improvement."

"Microsoft System Center should be easier to manage. However, it is complex to deploy, so people hesitate to use it. Though it has many features, such as licensing, asset tracking, and software deployment, we mainly use it for Windows updates. It protects many screens and integrates with databases, but it's complex compared to other solutions. Many now use cloud-based products or other tools like Automox to deploy updates and manage vulnerabilities."

"The platform's performance could be improved. Additionally, its UI needs to be well-upgraded and work faster."

"Less server consumption would help, as would better, more flexible reports."

"In Microsoft System Center, it is difficult to follow the steps to create dataflows at times."

More Microsoft System Center cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price is very high and it's the main reason that we are searching for alternatives."

"The licensing cost of IBM WebSphere Message Broker needs to be reduced"

"IBM software can be costly, but having a contract has helped manage and potentially lower costs over time."

"The solution is expensive."

"This product is more expensive than competing products."

"IBM products are generally more stable and have more features, but also come at a greater cost."

"I feel with IBM, when you want certain functions or features, you have to continuously purchase add-ons. There are always additional fees."

"The solution is expensive."

"On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing a six out of ten."

"I know that sometimes there is some reduction in the prices of Microsoft System Center because of the costs of Microsoft SQL Server, which can be advantageous."

"We maximized our license investment."

"Microsoft System Center's licensing is costly."

"Microsoft System Center is quite expensive."

"It's rolled into our enterprise subscription. The entire subscription is around $25,000 a year, however, that covers all the products that we use."

"I rate the product price as five to six on a scale of one to ten, where one means it is cheap and ten means it is expensive."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Infrastructure solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

21%

Computer Software Company

10%

Manufacturing Company

Insurance Company

No data available

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM WebSphere Message Broker?

IBM software can be costly, but having a contract has helped manage and potentially lower costs over time.

See all answers

What needs improvement with IBM WebSphere Message Broker?

There could be greater flexibility and agility in service creation for the product. As our business requirements evolve, we require more dynamic capabilities to adapt and scale our services accordi...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for IBM WebSphere Message Broker?

We use the product for exposing services at the application level, integrating with various architectures like WebSphere, and handling static service creation.

See all answers

What do you like most about Microsoft System Center?

The product's initial setup phase was easy.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft System Center?

Microsoft System Center's licensing is costly.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Microsoft System Center?

Microsoft System Center should be easier to manage. However, it is complex to deploy, so people hesitate to use it. Though it has many features, such as licensing, asset tracking, and software depl...

See all answers

Comparisons

IBM Integration Bus vs IBM WebSphere Message Broker

Compared 50% of the time

webMethods.io vs IBM WebSphere Message Broker

Compared 17% of the time

IBM DataPower Gateway vs IBM WebSphere Message Broker

Compared 12% of the time

IBM BPM vs IBM WebSphere Message Broker

Compared 11% of the time

Mule ESB vs IBM WebSphere Message Broker

Compared 10% of the time

More IBM WebSphere Message Broker Competitors

VMware Aria Operations for Applications vs Microsoft System Center

Compared 38% of the time

JBoss Enterprise Application Platform vs Microsoft System Center

Compared 27% of the time

Veeam Data Platform vs Microsoft System Center

Compared 19% of the time

IBM BPM vs Microsoft System Center

Compared 15% of the time

More Microsoft System Center Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

IBM WebSphere Message Broker

August 2025

Download IBM WebSphere Message Broker product report

Buyer's Guide

Microsoft System Center

August 2025

Download Microsoft System Center product report

Also Known As

WebSphere Message Broker

MS System Center

Overview

WebSphere Message Broker is an enterprise service bus (ESB) providing connectivity and universal data transformation for service-oriented architecture (SOA) and non-SOA environments. It allows businesses of any size to eliminate point-to-point connections and batch processing regardless of platform, protocol or data format.

IBM

System Center helps customers realize the benefits of the Microsoft Cloud Platform by delivering unified management. Experience fast time-to-value with out-of-the-box monitoring, provisioning, configuration, automation, protection and self-service.

Microsoft

Sample Customers

WestJet, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina, Sharp Corporation, Michelin Tire

Kassen_rztliche Vereinigung Nordrhein, Magyar Telekom Nyrt., Adeka, QualCare, Aeriandi, UniCredit Bank d.d., Mostar, Allianz Australia Ltd., Grupo Familia

Buyer's Guide

IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. Microsoft System Center

July 2025

Free Report: IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. Microsoft System Center

Find out what your peers are saying about IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. Microsoft System Center and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. Microsoft System Center report.

See our list of best Application Infrastructure vendors.

We monitor all Application Infrastructure reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.